Any Other 5D MKII Owners Feel A Bit Cheated?

[soundhound]

Anybody else feel a bit cheated that Canon didn't include the new AF and other features (dual processors etc) that are in the 7D, into the 5D MKII?


I don't know if they were too anxious to get the 5D MK II to the market or what, but personally, I wish they would have waited if they needed to in order to include the 7D's AF system, dual processors, artificial horizon etc, etc into the 5D MKII.


I think the 5D MKII would have been an absolute killer camera if they had done so, and addressed some of the criticisms in reviews of the 5D MKII.


I guess it's too much to hope for that a future firmware upgrade could at least include some of the features which do not need hardware modifications (like the new AF sensor).


Color me a bit miffed....... :-(

[Feanor]

Yeah, I'm a little annoyed, and agree that it'd have been an absolute killer camera had they done that, but it'd also have killed sales of the 1DIII / 1DsIII. Personally I suspect it was more of a marketing strategy than a technological decision.


Now you have the 7D for sports, birds & other fast subjects; the 5DII for image quality and low-light conditions (despite the outer AF points being rubbish in poor light) and the 1DsIII (or IV when it comes) for those who want both.


The trouble is that Canon seem to be so keen on preventing their own models from competing with each other by holding some models back to make clear distinctions between them and the 1D that they risk losing ground to Nikon. I already know of some people who are switching across, although I don't plan on it as not only would switching cost me a lot but also I'm not convinced by Nikon's over-priced top end glass and I hate the way everthing is backwards on their kit, even screw threads.

[soundhound]

Yeah, I'm a little annoyed, and agree that it'd have been an absolute killer camera had they done that, but it'd also have killed sales of the 1DIII / 1DsIII. Personally I suspect it was more of a marketing strategy than a technological decision.


Now you have the 7D for sports, birds & other fast subjects; the 5DII for image quality and low-light conditions (despite the outer AF points being rubbish in poor light) and the 1DsIII (or IV when it comes) for those who want both.


The trouble is that Canon seem to be so keen on preventing their own models from competing with each other by holding some models back to make clear distinctions between them and the 1D that they risk losing ground to Nikon. I already know of some people who are switching across, although I don't plan on it as not only would switching cost me a lot but also I'm not convinced by Nikon's over-priced top end glass and I hate the way everthing is backwards on their kit, even screw threads.
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>








Thanks for the feedback.


I don't know though if it would have killed the market for the 1D - doesn't that camera have a LOT more AF points than even the 7D has?


When I was originally making my decision of either the 5D MKII or the Nikon D700, what ended up swaying me is the Canon lens selection, especially the L series lenses.


I've been extremely happy with my 5D MK II, and frankly, the features which the 7D has are not something I would use regularly since I don't shoot action at all, and 99.9% of the time I only have the center AF point turned on. Still, the 7D having better AF capability overall (for that 0.1% of the time I might need it) is something that gets under my skin..... :-(

[Alan KE]

No not really, FF Vs 1.6 Crop. 5DMK2 is a great cam. now IF the 7D was a FF then i am sure Canon would have had people rioting. 7D looks like a great Sports and Wildlife solution.

[Keith B]

Sometimes I get a little peeved at the 5DmkII's limited focusing abilities. I hardly ever use the center point so I have had more than a few shots missed. I'm inclined to keep the ST-E2 on all the time for it's focus assist beam.


Lately I have been using my 580EXII with the Ray Flash as a fill and the arm blocks the focus assist beam. Arrrrrrr!

[Jon Ruyle]

Yeah, I'm a little annoyed, and agree that it'd have been an absolute killer camera had they done that, but it'd also have killed sales of the 1DIII / 1DsIII. Personally I suspect it was more of a marketing strategy than a technological decision.


I agree with that. It seems that Canon uses af to differentiate their most expensive full frame camera from the others, Nikon uses resolution. Given a choice, I think I would have chosen the af (and I would have been willing to pay a lot more for the same camera with a 1D-like af). On the other hand, just because I would have been willing to pay substantially more for a 5DII with a better af does not mean it would have been a good strategy for Canon. I suppose they've investigated the matter more deeply than we have. :)

[jimr]

Canon was waiting for some patents to clear. They may have had the technology ready for the 5D but not the patents. That is the story I have heard.

[hotsecretary]

I've honestly got $5k to drop on a camera + new lens right now.. and I'm so tempted to grab a 5DII + 24-70 right now.. but part of me is holding off until at least the end of Sept to see if they do have any big announcements.



I could wait until Spring/Summer if I had to.. for a 5D III?? I would love a 7D but it's 1.6 and I want FF.

[Keith B]

I've honestly got $5k to drop on a camera + new lens right now.. and I'm so tempted to grab a 5DII + 24-70 right now.. but part of me is holding off until at least the end of Sept to see if they do have any big announcements.



I could wait until Spring/Summer if I had to.. for a 5D III?? I would love a 7D but it's 1.6 and I want FF.






I wish they would have made the 24-70 the kit lens.


I'm sure you were joking but I don't think there will be a 5DIII for quite some time.

[hotsecretary]

Part of me is joking, part of me is hoping :)



Just like wishing for a 24-70 Hybrid IS 2L [:O]

[soundhound]

I think I'd be at least a _little_ bit satisfied if they had a significant firmware upgrade to the 5D MK II that incorporates at least _some_ of the things in the 7D.......wishing......hoping........

[Dallasphotog]

I guess the image quality and full frame sensor of the 5D MKII are going to continue to make me happy with that body. Personally, I feel like adding the 7D next year for sports, but I suspect the 1D MKIV will be close...


I suspect all the cool stuff on the 7D will end up on theMKIV, plus weather sealing, plus some crazy frame rate, plus, plus...

[lculpin]

I was actually planning on picking up a 5DII, but now I'm not so sure.... the 7D has a LOT of tempting features, but no FF is also a big bummer. I've been going nuts trying to figure out which one to go after... then again, if they have a sweet deal on either of them at PSWorld this month then maybe I'll just let that decide for me :P

[Daniel Browning]

Anybody else feel a bit cheated that Canon didn't include the new AF and other features (dual processors etc) that are in the 7D, into the 5D MKII?

No. On one level, I am a little annoyed that margins are all out of proportion with cost. (Nikon uses megapixels to justify a $3,000 premium of the D3X over the D3, where as Canon uses other features to justify a $3,500 premium of the 1Ds3 over the 5D2.) But even taking that into consideration, there isn't any grounds to feel cheated, because in order for me to have purchased it, I must have found the value sufficient.

If Canon claimed the 5D2 had an improved AF, dual digic, etc., and I later found out it wasn't true, then I would feel cheated. But I knew about its features before I bought it.


I don't know if they were too anxious to get the 5D MK II to the market or what,

I hope they were. It had been three years since the 5D, and I was sick of waiting. [:D]



but personally, I wish they would have waited if they needed to in order to include the 7D's AF system, dual processors, artificial horizon etc, etc into the 5D MKII.

The 5D2 frame rate is limited by mechanics. Wear and tear is something like the cube of the speed of the two parts. If the 5D2 (4 FPS) was as fast as the 7D (8 FPS), that's 16 times more wear and tear. That means Canon would have to build it 16 times better, or it will break 16 times sooner.

Furthermore, the mechanical frame rate is affected by the size of the mirror. Vibration goes up with the fourth power of mirror height. That gives the 5D2 five times more vibration at the same frame rate, another source of engineering difficulty.

It would be nice if Canon came out with an answer to Nikon's D700, but it would be a real change in pricing strategy.

[soundhound]

Good point about the shutter - something I've not realized. Let me be clear - I am very, very satisfied with my 5D MKII: it takes stunning images. I guess there's just something in the back of my mind that wishes that the 7D's features were also in the 5D MKII, even if I personally don't have use for them much.


My occupation is in the professional and consumer audio industry, and it's almost weekly change in technologies is frustrating. Maybe I'm naive in hoping that camera technology would be somewhat "stable". I guess that thinking is so "last-week!". In the early 1970s, I bought a Canon TL 35mm camera while I was in the Army, and it still works fine (providing I can find film for it!).


Oh well.......


Thanks everybody for putting up with my rant!

[Julius]

You have a great camera in the 5D MII....just enjoy it.

[Maleko]

I'd have a 5DMKII over a 7D any day! Stop worrying, the 5DMKII is damn awesome!


So it doesn thave some new bit and pieces that the NEWER 7D has, but thats because its NEWER, hell, I'm sure people who brought the 400D were well annoyed when the 450D came out so soon after! lol

[Feanor]

The 5D2 frame rate is limited by mechanics. Wear and tear is something like the cube of the speed of the two parts. If the 5D2 (4 FPS) was as fast as the 7D (8 FPS), that's 16 times more wear and tear. That means Canon would have to build it 16 times better, or it will break 16 times sooner.

Furthermore, the mechanical frame rate is affected by the size of the mirror. Vibration goes up with the fourth power of mirror height. That gives the 5D2 five times more vibration at the same frame rate, another source of engineering difficulty.

It would be nice if Canon came out with an answer to Nikon's D700, but it would be a real change in pricing strategy.
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>





I was thinking about this the other day while looking at Nikon gear out of curiosity. I don't really understand how you can say that the mechanics are the limiting factor to framerate on the 5DII when the D700, which is also full-frame and therefore has the same physical limits, is capable of such fast framerates. Now since the cameras cost about the same it could be said that Canon, instead of spending money on the mechanics of a fast shutter speed, have spent money on a higher resolution sensor. And that this sensor would also need far a far more powerful processor to compete with the D700's shutter speed.


But, to me, this is a question of emphasis - rather than limits. I think this might be what you were saying but I originally read your post as saying that it would be prohibitively difficult to design a full-frame mirror that can move that fast. The point is that the D700 is also a compromise - because they have compromised on the resolution of the sensor.


So it comes down to cost, rather than mechanics - not to mention Canon's desire to ensure to ensure that the people still buy the 1D series cameras (I believe many Nikonains don't see any point in spending the extra cash on the D3).


And so, IMO, the question of whether we really want 21MP in a camera or whether we'd have preferred the same emphasis of functionality as the D700 remains.

[musickna]

I have both cameras - the 5D II and the 7D. The 5D II gives me slightly better image quality plus full frame capability. The 7D gives me better focusing options and a faster frame rate. Yes, it would have been nice to see the 7D's focusing features on the 5D II, but that would put the camera close to the 1D range and I suspect Canon deliberately chose to keep their top line cameras - and their price tags - in a class by themselves.


I do not personally feel hard done by. I like the 7D's ergonomics and general usability better than that of the 5D II, but it's not a deal breaker by any means. The two cameras compliment each other very well. I could have waited, added the price tags together, and gone for a 1D IV, but I'm happy to have the two bodies plus the use of my existing EF-S lenses on the 7D.

[Daniel Browning]

I was thinking about this the other day while looking at Nikon gear out of curiosity. I don't really understand how you can say that the mechanics are the limiting factor to framerate on the 5DII when the D700, which is also full-frame and therefore has the same physical limits, is capable of such fast framerates.


As I think you surmised, there are two separate issues here:


What limits the frame rate of the 5D2? (Answer: slow mechanical parts.)
Why have slow mechanical parts in the 5D2? (Answer: marketing strategy.)


I was commenting principally on the former, but I'll discuss the latter now.



Now since the cameras cost about the same it could be said that Canon, instead of spending money on the mechanics of a fast shutter speed, have spent money on a higher resolution sensor. And that this sensor would also need far a far more powerful processor to compete with the D700's shutter speed.


My guess is that's what the manufacturers want us to think, but I'm not sure if it's really the case.



I think this might be what you were saying but I originally read your post as saying that it would be prohibitively difficult to design a full-frame mirror that can move that fast.


I hinted at what I thought was the reason when I said "It would be nice if Canon came out with an answer to Nikon's D700, but it would be a real change in pricing strategy." In other words, I think the reason why the 5D2 lacks fast mechanical parts is due to pricing strategy (specifically, margin maximization through product differentiation).

Let me illustrate the difference in strategy between Nikon and Canon. The Nikon D3X ($8000) has the exact same body and features as the D3 ($5,000); you pay $3,000 more just to get more megapixels. Nikon wants you to think that it costs $3,000 for the resolution.

The Canon 1Ds3 (around $6,700 at the time of the 5D2 introduction?) has the exact same resolution as the 5D2 ($2,700); you pay $4,000 more to get a better body (autofocus, build, etc.). Canon wants you to think that it costs $4,000 for all those features.

See the conflict there? I think the reality is that neither of those features cost anywhere near $3k or $4k -- they just need an excuse to capitalize on photographers that can afford high margins. The fact that they chose different excuses proves (according to my limited understanding) that they're both bogus.

Of course, if you're not in that high-margin category, you might actually appreciate that Canikon are doing it this way. By exploiting higher margins from the $8k buyers, they can offer cheaper cameras to the rest of the customers. (Kind of light progressive tax.) The downside is that everyone loses access to those features which would have been cheap to implement in low-end cameras if they weren't used for product differentiation.

I'm hoping that eventually Canikon will start using features I don't care about to differentiate their high-margin products. They could give the $3,000 cameras all the important features (body, autofocus, resolution, etc.), and try to fool the rich folks with some useless feature, like "platinum-coated alloy results in better autofocus" or something. I'm not holding my breath, though. :)

[Feanor]

I have both cameras - the 5D II and the 7D. The 5D II gives me slightly better image quality plus full frame capability. The 7D gives me better focusing options and a faster frame rate. Yes, it would have been nice to see the 7D's focusing features on the 5D II, but that would put the camera close to the 1D range and I suspect Canon deliberately chose to keep their top line cameras - and their price tags - in a class by themselves.


I do not personally feel hard done by. I like the 7D's ergonomics and general usability better than that of the 5D II, but it's not a deal breaker by any means. The two cameras compliment each other very well. I could have waited, added the price tags together, and gone for a 1D IV, but I'm happy to have the two bodies plus the use of my existing EF-S lenses on the 7D.
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>





Interesting. If you were me, and bearing in mind that I rarely have the opportunity or the time for landscape photography, but am otherwise pretty eclectic in what I like to shoot - birds &amp; nature, people, low light - which camera would you choose? I bought the 5DII mainly for its low light abilities, but the 7D isn't bad in this regard and anyway it's not at the top of my priorities either.






In other words, I think the
reason why the 5D2 lacks fast mechanical parts is due to pricing
strategy (specifically, margin maximization through product
differentiation).


...

I'm hoping that eventually Canikon will start using
features I don't care about to differentiate their high-margin
products. They could give the $3,000 cameras all the important features
(body, autofocus, resolution, etc.), and try to fool the rich folks
with some useless feature, like "platinum-coated alloy results in
better autofocus" or something. I'm not holding my breath, though. :)





Ah, yes, a very good point :). But then again product differentiation is of course a marketing strategy used in many fields, from mobile phones, to computers, even cars. The top-end models always bring in more profit and I'm not sure we can begrudge Canikon for this nor, as nice it would be, do I expect that they'll aim the top models at people who've money to burn on features they don't really need :(.

[musickna]

Interesting. If you were me, and bearing in mind that I rarely have the opportunity or the time for landscape photography, but am otherwise pretty eclectic in what I like to shoot - birds &amp; nature, people, low light - which camera would you choose? I bought the 5DII mainly for its low light abilities, but the 7D isn't bad in this regard and anyway it's not at the top of my priorities either.








If I had to chose based on the criteria you list, I would go with the 7D. As you say, the 5D II is superior in low light but the 7D is not bad at all. The faster frame rate and sensitive focus helps a lot with moving objects - birds, animals etc. You also have a bit more reach with a telephoto lens using the densely pixel-populated APS-C sensor - also useful for nature shots.


In practice, this is how my own use of these cameras has worked out. I use the 5D II primarily for static landscapes and/or low light situations and the 7D for birds and animals. Carrying these two cameras with me on a nature hike has proven to be a very satisfactory arrangement.

[peety3]

I've honestly got $5k to drop on a camera + new lens right now.. and I'm so tempted to grab a 5DII + 24-70 right now.. but part of me is holding off until at least the end of Sept to see if they do have any big announcements.





Is there a notation on the check that says "holder must purchase a camera and a lens to use this check"? Why not a 1D4 camera?






I could wait until Spring/Summer if I had to.. for a 5D III?? I would love a 7D but it's 1.6 and I want FF.
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>





Don't hold your breath. 5D2 owners will feel cheated if a 5D3 comes out this summer.

[crosbyharbison]

Don't hold your breath. 5D2 owners will feel cheated if a 5D3 comes out this summer.
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>





The 5D appears to be on a three year revision cycle. Using this logic expect to wait two years.

[Daniel Browning]

The 5D appears to be on a three year revision cycle. Using this logic expect to wait two years.


I thought they were going to switch to a 18 month or 24-month cycle after the 5D2 had such great sales, but when they announced the firmware update (coming January), I changed my mind. If they had a new camera coming out soon, I don't think they'd improve the existing ones through firmware due to the loss in sales. So now I'm guessing that it will be at least 24-months, probably 30.

[Keith B]

I don't think I've ever really felt cheated. I still think a full frame 21MP camera for $2700 is a pretty good deal. I would have felt better if the AF was as good as my 40D. The banding issue is on my S list right now. I recently ran into the issue but I know how to avoid it in the future.


I am contemplating a 7D purchase though, but not to replace my 5D2, but my 40D. I am shooting surf pics for a company and would like the crop-ability of an 18MP image since I'm shooting with the 100-400. I think I'd rather spend $1800 and crop down than spend $8000 on a lens since I'm happy with the IQ I'm getting from the 100-400.

[Colin]

My occupation is in the professional and consumer audio industry, and it's almost weekly change in technologies is frustrating. Maybe I'm naive in hoping that camera technology would be somewhat "stable". I guess that thinking is so "last-week!". In the early 1970s, I bought a Canon TL 35mm camera while I was in the Army, and it still works fine (providing I can find film for it!).
<div style="CLEAR: both"]</div>



As if it wasn't bad enough with DTS coming out with endless formats BEFORE HDMI audio transmission, and HDMI versions 1._______ to whatever. Just make the freaking thing work all the time and not take forever with the handshaking, and screw the unintentional power automation.... Jerks.


I feel you. But, I wish I had a mkii to complain about. My plain old 5D, though, still gets me by, and I love it.

[SupraSonic]

Bring Back the EOS 3 Series.

[Brendan7]

I was thinking about this the other day while looking at Nikon gear out of curiosity. I don't really understand how you can say that the mechanics are the limiting factor to framerate on the 5DII when the D700, which is also full-frame and therefore has the same physical limits, is capable of such fast framerates.


The nikon EXPEED processor is better.


Also, it only has to process 12 mpix images. This makes for a faster burst. you could technically make a FF camera that shot 20 fps at 3 mpix (daniel can correct me on that.) The canon shoots 21 mpix images and so has a slower burst. The 7d has 2 processors so it shoots 18 mpix at 8fps.

[HiFiGuy1]

I think Daniel was addressing the mechanical aspect of speed limitations and reliability more than the data processing aspect. It isn't so much a processing power issue. The 1D Mk IV has a larger mirror than a 7D and a 16 MP sensor, but can still comfortably process 10 fps, whereas the 7D is rated at about 8 fps, so the 1D Mk IV seems to be built to a higher standard. As it should be for $5k. They both have dual Digic IV processors, if I am not mistaken, so the differences lie elsewhere.

[adamj]

Even before the 7D was launched, I was disappointed that the 5D II didn't get an improved AF system. I've always been unhappy with the AF capability of
the Canon bodies I've owned (all sub-1 series), particularly in Servo mode. So, my hands will remain in my pockets until Canon introduces the 5D III which I feel sure will get the 7D-style AF system its price warrants.


I don't care too much about frame rate, nor about the 5D II's user-unfriendly video functionality (the 7D's controls appear much better). The AF really is the only killer for me.

[Sinh Nhut Nguyen]

sure, they could have included better AF, 8 fps, dual processors, artificial horizon, but the price would not have been $2700. I don't feel cheated by Canon, and neither should you. For the intended purposes, potraits, landscape and studio work, the 5D Mark II is an excellent camera. You want the ultimate camera in term of image quality and performance, get the $5000 1D Mark IV or wait for the 1Ds Mark IV. Get over it and be happy with your camera [:)]

[crosbyharbison]

The price is now 2500 at adorama (:





2200 refurbished

[Alan]

sure, they could have included better AF, 8 fps, dual processors, artificial horizon, but the price would not have been $2700. I don't feel cheated by Canon, and neither should you. For the intended purposes, potraits, landscape and studio work, the 5D Mark II is an excellent camera. You want the ultimate camera in term of image quality and performance, get the $5000 1D Mark IV or wait for the 1Ds Mark IV. Get over it and be happy with your camera /emoticons/emotion-1.gif
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>





Well said, Nate! Ditto!

[apersson850]

The nikon EXPEED processor is better.Better? Because it's neither capable of a frame rate that can scare even an entry level camera nor capable of 1080p video? As soon as you use the full image recording capability of the camera (14-bit RAW), they drop to rates in the 1.8-2.5 frames/second range, where the Canon cameras always provide 14-bit conversion, without loosing their frame rate.


Different, sure, but better?


A Canon 3D would probably incorporate the high full frame resolution and at least 40D-ish frame rate, probably coupled with some more advanced autofocus and some other goodies, but at a cost approaching the 1D Mark IV.

[adamj]

sure, they could have included better AF, 8 fps, dual processors, artificial horizon, but the price would not have been $2700. I don't feel cheated by Canon, and neither should you. For the intended purposes, potraits, landscape and studio work, the 5D Mark II is an excellent camera. You want the ultimate camera in term of image quality and performance, get the $5000 1D Mark IV or wait for the 1Ds Mark IV. Get over it and be happy with your camera /emoticons/emotion-1.gif
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>








As I said before, I'm not bothered by the lack of any of the stuff you listed, except for the AF which appears to be no better than the AF on the original Rebel body (arguably worse because it covers a smaller area of the frame).


I've chosen not to buy a 5D II specifically because, as you say yourself, its intended purpose is 'portraits, landscape and studio work', i.e. static subjects only. Being barely able to track my kids running in their sports day (as is my past experience of Canon's 9-point AF system) is too much of a shortcoming for any $2,700 body in my view. I'm not a spec-head - all I was hoping for was an upgrade of the old AF system which I've found inadequate in the past.


I'll wait for the 5D III which I'm sure will get a 7D-style AF system and will then be a good general-purpose body, rather than a body equipped only for static subjects. I bet the 5D III will be out next year.


All the best.

[crosbyharbison]

At $2200refurbished, I'm considering adding a second 5d II to my arsenal. I have no trouble tracking non-static objects and have the pics to prove it:


http://www.crosbyharbison.com/files/volley.jpg


I noticed a positive difference between my 40d and my 5d II in terms of auto focus. I tried out the 7D today and loved it though. But the 5d gets the focus right good enough for me (: That said, my only real gripe is the 1/200 flash sync speed ): grrr

[Bill W]

CH....great volley ball shot...how about a little info on the shot, i.e. exif, lens, how close were you, andwhere did you focus for this shot?


thanks


Bill

[crosbyharbison]

5d II + canon 24-70 @ 24mm


AI servo all points active from ~4 feet away. Subject would sprint from out of frame right to dead center in a split second and the 5d would lock right away.


iso 1600, f/3.2, 1/200 sec

[EdN]

Why would any 5D MKII owner feel cheated? It had a great feature set which was openly available for people to see in person or research at their convenience. The price was openly advertised. If anyone found the price unreasonable for the feature set, no one forced them to purchase the camera. They could walk away. Any one purchasing the camera shouldn't feel cheated because they were never obligated to purchase the camera. They only bought it if they chose.


As technology advances everyday, certainly it would be great if newer features could have been incorporated into older cameras like the 5D MKII which is a year old now. If they were, I'm sure people would want even more features included.


Yes, I would have loved to have more features in my 5D MKII but I purchased it and haven't looked back. It's a great camera.

[Bombsight]

I have both.


..... and I still cant make up my mind iftwo great bodies are better than one even greater one (1DsMKIII).[*-)]


I do know this though .... If I was a Nikon owner ... I'd feel cheated everytime I bought new glass from them![I]